proforma_invoices_bulk_delete

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the draft-only constraint and discloses it returns 'count of deleted and any errors,' which is useful. However, it doesn't describe failure modes (e.g., what happens to non-draft IDs — skipped or error?), partial-deletion behavior, or rollback semantics.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences, zero wasted words. Front-loaded with the verb+resource, followed by constraints and return info. Efficient and readable.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a batch-delete tool with 100% schema coverage and 2 params, the description is mostly adequate. It captures scope, eligibility, and return shape. But lacking annotations, it doesn't convey side effects beyond deletion (e.g., irreversible nature, cascading to related data), and doesn't clarify error handling for ineligible IDs, which matters for a bulk destructive operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema documents both parameters (ids array and companyId override). The description adds little beyond schema — it restates the batch concept already in the name and schema. The draft-only qualifier adds domain context but doesn't clarify param behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clear verb+resource: 'Delete multiple proforma invoices in batch.' Distinguishes from siblings (proforma_invoices_delete is singular). The phrase 'multiple...in batch' effectively separates it from the single-delete sibling.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description notes 'Only draft proformas can be deleted,' which gives an important eligibility constraint. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives (e.g., proforma_invoices_delete for single), though the batch scope is implied by the name and description. No explicit when-not-to-use guidance beyond the draft restriction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.